The names of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission employees who viewed pornography on the taxpayers’ dime will remain a secret to protect their privacy, a federal judge has ruled.

“The Court concludes that the public interest in the individuals’ names is negligible, at best,” U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello wrote in a 29-page opinion issued Tuesday. “The SEC has already disclosed information sufficient to inform the public about the SEC’s operations and activities related to the misconduct.”

An SEC investigation found 24 employees and seven employees of SEC contractors were using agency computers during work hours to access pornography from 2005 through this year. Those entangled in the scandal were either fired or disciplined.

Denver attorney Kevin D. Evans, outraged by the conduct, sought the identities of the SEC employees because he wanted the public to know who was responsible and what positions they held within the federal government.

He filed suit after the SEC denied his Freedom of Information Act request for the names, citing privacy concerns. The SEC did disclose the discipline imposed and what positions the employees held within the agency.

In June, an SEC worker who didn’t want his name released to the public filed a motion under seal asking the judge to protect his privacy. He believed disclosing his name would embarrass his family and ruin his professional career.

Arguello agreed that the sexual nature of the misconduct reinforced the need to retain the employees’ privacy.

“Had the public disclosure been a relatively innocuous report that SEC employees had been found spending hours surfing the Internet, the implicated privacy interest might weigh less,” Arguello wrote. “But that is not the case. Rather, the public was informed that employees were found to have spent hours at work viewing sexually explicit websites. This reflects on the employees’ sexual needs and/or desires and, in at least one instance, an admitted long-standing addiction to Internet pornography.”

Evans said he was surprised by the court’s ruling but hasn’t decided whether he wants to file an appeal.

“I think the courts have so watered down FOIA that the exemptions are swallowing the rules,” he said. “It’s time for Congress to address the issue.”

Stephen Peters, an attorney who represented an SEC employee identified only as John Doe, praised the decision.

“My client is grateful for the court’s careful consideration of the important privacy interests which were implicated by this case,” he said.

What do you do in a rental market where seemingly every new apartment building is offering a boatload of amenities and high-end finishes? If you're Charleston, S.C.-based apartment developer Greystar you double down and build an extra luxury project.